A couple of weeks ago I played in a college club tournament against this one guy and lost 6-0. He was serving in the 120's, huge forehand and never missed a single shot. He should have been in D1 but I don't know his reason why he doesn't. When you only win 3 points on your own serve, that's when you know you've been beaten.

i started thinking ....if i could only fluke out an ace, i would have avoided the dreaded double bagel.

i ended up losing the game.

choke?

Click to expand...

That's not a choke, that's just poor decision-making. An ace should not be a fluke, you go for it because you know you can get an ace or a service winner off of it. Your alternatives to avoiding the double bagel are getting your first serve in or getting your second serve in. Choking implies falling apart under pressure. You're up 40-0. There's no pressure on you. If you can't get a serve in the box at will then you have no business going for an ace. Luck has nothing to do with it. If you don't have the type of serve that can reliably and consistently win you points then you need to think more along the lines of starting the point and finishing it with your groundstrokes.

That's not a choke, that's just poor decision-making. An ace should not be a fluke, you go for it because you know you can get an ace or a service winner off of it. Your alternatives to avoiding the double bagel are getting your first serve in or getting your second serve in. Choking implies falling apart under pressure. You're up 40-0. There's no pressure on you. If you can't get a serve in the box at will then you have no business going for an ace. Luck has nothing to do with it. If you don't have the type of serve that can reliably and consistently win you points then you need to think more along the lines of starting the point and finishing it with your groundstrokes.

Click to expand...

trust me 40-0 5-0. i can blow it easily.

i was hoping for a shank winner.

the point is......got to stay in the moment. once u start thinking, if only i did that ....u are done.

many rec players think that they choke or underperform but in reality that is just their level of play.

we tend to remember our highlights the most. thus we think that "on fire" periods are the norm how we should play. of course we all have those periods where we don't miss a ball for 10 minutes but this not our normal level of play.

many rec players think that they choke or underperform but in reality that is just their level of play.

we tend to remember our highlights the most. thus we think that "on fire" periods are the norm how we should play. of course we all have those periods where we don't miss a ball for 10 minutes but this not our normal level of play.

Losing this way or that way is not the way to tell. 99% of the time you lose, you got beat. The one exception is if you dominate the match, win the first set, up a break in the second then completely fold and end up losing the match. That is choking. Missing "easy" shots alone is not choking.

Losing this way or that way is not the way to tell. 99% of the time you lose, you got beat. The one exception is if you dominate the match, win the first set, up a break in the second then completely fold and end up losing the match. That is choking. Missing "easy" shots alone is not choking.

Click to expand...

i was planning to burn my racquets after the match if i had been competitive.

my body moved as one piece. my arm and whole right side felt like a rigid piece of wood. kinetic chain was not existent. i was over-running short balls.

i played for 4 more hrs after the match. i was hitting fine against same level of player (by looking at their tournament result).

i dont know whats worse - being a choker or lacking the innate qualities. maybe both?!

The best part of losing and choking, tightening up and playing badly, is .....
that Federer, Agassi, Connors, McEnroe, Murray, etc. have all done it, have all gone thru your exact experience, back in the past.

i was planning to burn my racquets after the match if i had been competitive.

my body moved as one piece. my arm and whole right side felt like a rigid piece of wood. kinetic chain was not existent. i was over-running short balls.

i played for 4 more hrs after the match. i was hitting fine against same level of player (by looking at their tournament result).

i dont know whats worse - being a choker or lacking the innate qualities. maybe both?!

Click to expand...

I get it. Take a step back and look at it this way: everyone expects that you would have less nerves just hittin' aroun' with your buds as you would in a match that you cared about, right? That is a given. The unknown is how much these nerves are going to impact your game. Maybe a lot, maybe a little. That is not choking, that is typical, expected, matchplay nerves, stagefright, whathaveyou.

You can lessen that over time with experience, yoga, hypnotism, whatever. Hell, if Murray is doing it, why would you expect not to be dealing with it?

Choking is when (even with your matchplay nerves) you are dominating, then do a 180 and lose abruptly.

I get it. Take a step back and look at it this way: everyone expects that you would have less nerves just hittin' aroun' with your buds as you would in a match that you cared about, right? That is a given. The unknown is how much these nerves are going to impact your game. Maybe a lot, maybe a little. That is not choking, that is typical, expected, matchplay nerves, stagefright, whathaveyou.

You can lessen that over time with experience, yoga, hypnotism, whatever. Hell, if Murray is doing it, why would you expect not to be dealing with it?

Choking is when (even with your matchplay nerves) you are dominating, then do a 180 and lose abruptly.

Click to expand...

i want it to end. but, i am not sure how close i m to the finish line.

i must feel i m close (may only be a misconception) which really adds to the tension.

i want it to end. but, i am not sure how close i m to the finish line.

i must feel i m close (may only be a misconception) which really adds to the tension.

Click to expand...

A lot of players play to win the point until they are at game point, then they play to not lose. That is to say, they change how they play. Why would anyone be suprised at a change in outcome when the player changes how they play the game?

These players run into trouble with high consistancy players, since they are not going to lose the point themselves.

I believe there are TWO players on a singles court, and both trying his best to win. What YOU do is not always the key. Maybe what you, AND him, does is a better reflection on the course of the tennis match.